Friday, 1 May 2015

6 days to the elections

We
witnessed one of those strange moments on Sunday, when – as the circus just outside town was
breaking down its tents and preparing to depart – another main ring event
was being staged in Boston town centre.

It took
the form of a metal cage made of pedestrian crowd control barriers
containing several men – one of whom was holding what looked for a moment like
a lion tamer’s whip, but which turned out to be a microphone on a cable.

The
occasion – if so it can be described – was the arrival in town of the BBC’s Sunday
Politics show, in which the forthcoming election in Boston, which the BBC
reckons will be “unlike any before” was debated by four of the main party
candidates ... with the rest chipping in on video.

With the
election so close, we tuned in with interest – only to be broadly disappointed.

Each of
the four main candidates, Conservative Matt Warman, Paul Kenny for Labour,
UKIP’s Robin Hunter-Clarke and Lib-Dem candidate David Watts responded
robustly, but not impressively to the questions – and the programme seemed to lack any depth,
fire, or character.

Individually,
the candidates seem scarcely to have warmed up, despite several so-called
Hustings in recent times.

Matt
Warman for the Tories came across as keen to please but focussing too
strongly on the “Tories must win nationally” rather than “why this
particular Tory should be elected in Boston.”

Paul
Kenny got his points across, and has sharpened his delivery, which used to tend
to ramble, although he is still entangling local and national issues in a
mildly confusing way.

Robin
Hunter-Clarke has improved his act since his earlier television appearances,
but the range of subjects he is covering remains too narrow – on Sunday he came across as a one note
immigration samba.

We had
not seen or heard the Liberal-Democrat David Watts before – something we would
be happy to do again.

As we
said earlier the remaining candidates were given a minute or two to make their
pitch, which given the tokenistic nature of the BBC’s concession means
that they might as well not have bothered.

Only Lyn
Luxton tried to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat, by telling her
followers:

Crowds?

Addlethorpe?

Surely,
she was dreaming.

Our Best in Show award for the BBC’s less
than impressive production goes to Paul Kenny – who had far and away the best
haircut.

***

A major
criticism of the BBC’s coverage – and minor ones abound – is the way that the
pre-filmed report segued seamlessly from mention of the huge rise in immigration between 2001 and
into footage of the protest meeting in the Market Place with no indication that
this was well over two years old.

An
uninformed viewer would have concluded that protests were still a way of life
in Boston – whilst in fact things have calmed down considerably.

The poor
visual presentation was compounded by staging the event inside the pedestrian
cage and around the Five Lamps.

According
to reports ahead of the broadcast, the show was being staged outside the
Assembly Rooms, beneath the balcony.

The
venue’s general manager was quoted as saying: “I have been working hard to
ensure that there remains a balance at (the) Assembly Rooms, being both a
popular night time venue, and a utilised community asset. Events like this ensure
that we bring a total variance of different people through our doors,” whilst
the Assembly Rooms owner Matt Clark declared: “This is an exciting event to be
involved with, not only for the Assembly Rooms, but Boston as well.”

It was
certainly exciting day for the night club, which got good television coverage
and a name check or two as well – despite being completely uninvolved.

And
certainly, no one came “through the doors,” as suggested.

***

UKIP was
in for a disappointment from the BBC’s Panorama
programme the following day.

In a
cliché ridden snapshot of Skegness –
bingo, fish and chips, camel racing and the like – we heard
Nate Silver “America's rock star
statistician” predict that Skegness ... at one moment “the jewel of the
English seaside” and the next “the most deprived seaside town in England”
... had to be retained by the Tories if they are to win an overall
majority.

And
according to one of Nate’s little helpers, UKIP has a one in fifty chance of
success.

Not once
was the name of Boston ever mentioned in the programme – but surprisingly,
given the content and approach, candy floss never appeared.

***

For those
of us in the less glamorous role of common or garden voters, the decision now
is – who do I vote for?

One thing
that can be said for the BBC Sunday
Politics show is that it offered no help whatever in this respect – but our
instincts say that we are looking at a Conservative/UKIP contest, with Labour
coming third.

The polls
have been too close to call for a long while – but it’s being suggested that
support for UKIP is running out of steam and that the party might not be the
shoo-in that was first imagined in some areas.

***

But what
about locally?

Last week
we took a detailed look at the promises on offer from the ruling Conservative
group and the UKIP candidates.

Just in
the nick of time, a copy of Labour’s manifesto dropped through the door of
Number 1 Eye Street.

Some of
it includes echoes of the last local election in 2011 – such as the promise to
introduce dog wardens and bring back the Party in the Park – whilst other parts
seek to turn back the clock.

We’re
talking about the idea of reintroducing Sunday bus services – many of which
disappeared because of cuts in subsidies by Lincolnshire County Council,
against a background of poor uptake by passengers.

Raising
wages and lowering rents also feature on Labour’s agenda – as does the
reintroduction of flood warning sirens, which were done away with some years
ago ... notionally on the grounds that there were higher tech means of
alerting people to flooding, but also because county hall didn’t want to spend
the money.

Labour is
also proposing sandbag collection points around the town – which we
are certain will prove so popular that there will be none left before the first
rains even begin.

All this
– plus slashing car parking charges, which provide one of the few forms
of income for Boston Borough Council –
suggest what could be a very expensive package for local
taxpayers.

We would
hope to see thorough and detailed costing before Labour started on this
shopping list ... and want to know where the money will be coming from.

***

It’s now
almost make-your-mind-up-time, and the box where you place your mark on 7th May
will help determine who runs our country and our council for the next several
years.

Unless
you are party politically driven, it’s best to spend some time looking at the
promises that are being made.

We’ve
just looked at the Labour list which is interesting, but also impracticable in
many respects and certainly expensive.

We
mentioned the Tories last week – and
their five “priorities” don’t amount to much.

Delivery
of a long term plan that will see a distributor road being built is not
something for the coming four years –
but more an uphill grind over the next forty.

Working
in partnership to deliver the Boston Barrier is something that has been going
on for years and barring any economic mishaps will now go ahead – come hell or high water, if you will forgive
the pun.

And a
“Cabinet Question Time” sounds good on paper – but then so did the trumpeting that
council meetings could be filmed 18 months ago. Since then – apart from a brief bit of filming for its
novelty value – nothing more has
happened.

This
council leadership has been one of the least transparent and most
secretive as far as things that matter are concerned – and whilst a “Question Time” concept sounds
seductive, we have to remember that the meetings start at 10am and a recent one
was over by 10-30am.

Who would
seriously believe that someone would rate a meeting such as this so important
that they will take at least half a day off work to attend a half-an-hour
meeting.

Smoke and
mirrors.

And
whilst UKIP has a raft of broad local policies, individual promises need close
inspection to ensure that they are deliverable.

A quick
flip through the pledges on offer include many things that are simply beyond
the pay grade of local councils – responsibilities of County Hall and national
government or the NHS.

With
election promises – as with anything else – always read the small print
thoroughly before signing up.

We urge
everyone who has an interest in Boston to turn out and vote – but to weigh up
the promises of those who want you to hand them power and not to be taken for
granted.

As Al
Capone, the legendary gangster has been famously quoted as saying: "Vote
early – and vote often."

***

Having
raised the issue a few times in recent weeks, it was with a sense of schadenfreude that we noticed the
laborious explanation issued by Boston Borough Council to try to clarify the
effects of ward boundary changes on voters in the Fishtoft area.

Some people
have received their postal ballot papers but – in the words of Worst Street –
“may not realise that for electoral purposes the Fishtoft Parish Council area
is split into two wards ...”

The
reason for this is most likely because, the borough council has not bothered to
try to make this information clear and accessible.

With a
number of new wards popping up across the borough, and changes as to who votes
where, we hope that the council seizes the chance to tell people where to go
– in the nicest possible way, or
course – before it is too late.

***

A sympathiser
with what some see as over-generous publicity for Boston’s mayor in the run up
to the elections draws our attention to an interesting way of measuring the
passage of time in the Boston Bulletin.

This
exciting and vibrant publication tells us: “Centenarians are not known to be
like London buses – arriving in twos – but recently in Boston no fewer than four came along at once.”

The item
then went on to captivate us with no fewer than four pictures of the mayor
exchanging wrinkly handshakes with the simultaneous centenarians.

Simultaneous?

Not
quite.

There
also appeared to be five, not four, when you delved deeper into the story.

According
to the bulletin, the first of these “all at once” oldies was visited in
January, followed by the next in February, the third in March and the fourth at
Easter.

But we
were also told that at the beginning of December last year, a 101 year-old also
received a mayoral visit – although the
excitement would appear to have been so great that she died not long after..

Not for
the first time, we are reminded of the motto quoted by one of our first
editors.

Never let
the facts get in the way of a good story.

***

Staying
with the Boston Bulletin, after last week’s blog we received the following
email from Boston Borough Council’s Labour group leader Paul Gleeson, which
said:

“I noted
your aside on my concerns about the Boston Bulletin.

“Section
28 of the Government's guidance on council publications states ‘... local
authorities should not publish or incur expenditure in commissioning in hard
copy or on any website, newsletters, newssheets or similar communications which
seek to emulate commercial newspapers in style or content.

“Where
local authorities do commission or publish newsletters, newssheets or similar
communications, they should not issue them more frequently than quarterly,
apart from parish councils which should not issue them more frequently than
monthly.

“Such
communications should not include material other than information for the
public about the business, services and amenities of the council or other local
service providers..."

“Whilst
my view of the guidance is straightforward and means that the bulletin should
only be published quarterly, this view is not accepted by the council's
monitoring officer.

“As the
restriction is only contained in a guidance. my only option is to continue to
pursue the matter with the monitoring officer, which I am still doing – as I am
of the opinion her replies to me still have not
adequately addressed the issue of frequency of publication.

“At
present I am awaiting a further reply from the monitoring officer”

***

We now
know a little more since last week's blog about plans to develop Haven Wharf
alongside the river in the centre of the town.

click to enlarge

The
application was made on 7th April on behalf of Hanseatic
Developments Ltd, which at the time had not been incorporated at Companies House
... and wasn’t until 23rd April.

As a
result we now know that the company lists just one company director – 48 year-old
Simon George Brown – who has expressed the wish to “adopt entirely bespoke
articles.”

The
company’s registered address is 5 Resolution Close, on
Endeavour Park in Boston, which is also home to 33 other companies –
24 of them active, plus nine which have been dissolved.

We
believe that this is known as an accommodation address.

According
to this week’s “exclusive” report in the Boston
Standard – which appeared just a week after our own piece in Boston Eye, the scheme is set to cost
£10 million.

Mr
Brown’s background appears to be in transport and haulage.

We await
further developments on the site with interest.

***

That’s it
for this week.

Please
make sure that you stick your ‘X’ in a box –
the worst you can do is to vote for monkeys and find that you are stuck
with a bunch of clowns – but you can then at least say that you looked at what
they said and took a decision.

Next
week, we hope to publish the headline results on Friday followed by a more
detailed analysis of what it might mean locally.

You can write to us at boston.eye@googlemail.com Your
e-mails will be treated in confidence and published anonymously if requested.

No comments:

Post a Comment

About the author

is written and edited by retired Lincolnshire born writer and broadcaster Malcolm Swire, who was brought up in London, where he began his career in journalism.
In the 1960s he joined the Boston Standard before returning to London to write for the UK’s national news agency, the Press Association – then based in Fleet Street.
He returned to Lincolnshire –where his family history goes back more than a century – in various public relations roles, before becoming a founder member of BBC Radio Lincolnshire,where he created the station's Go for Gold appeal,which raised hundreds of thousands of pounds for local charities.
Over the years, he read the news, presented programmes and retired from the BBC as the station's Programme Organiser and Deputy Managing Editor.
He started the Boston Eye blog in February 2007 and has vowed to continue until Boston Borough Council's leadership is all that it should be!
He has dug in for a long wait!